CAPIC Myths & Facts

Below are some common myths about CAPIC, along with facts debunking them.  For a PDF version of this page, click here

  1. Myth: CAPIC approved internships are not comparable to APPIC member or APA-accredited internships in overall quality of the training experience.

Fact: CAPIC approved internships require the same training criteria as both APPIC member and APA accredited internships in terms of professional staff, supervision, training experiences, and the like.

 

  1. Myth: All CAPIC approved internships are unfunded and CAPIC encourages unpaid internships.

Fact: Almost 50% of CAPIC approved internships provide funding to interns. CAPIC encourages all member internships to provide a reasonable stipend to students. The primary reason for unfunded internships is the extremely limited resources available to many CAPIC internships, which prioritize allocating their limited resources to provide services to their local and often underserved communities. Some internships also have internal restrictions prohibiting stipends.

 

  1. Myth: Other states do not recognize applicants for licensure who have completed a CAPIC approved internship.

Fact: While many state boards explicitly mention APA accredited internships, the vast majority also allow equivalent alternatives. Further, at a recent (Nov 2015) meeting of the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB), the State Board delegates overwhelmingly agreed that an APA-accredited internship should not be the only acceptable internship requirement for licensure.

CAPIC advocacy led the California Board of Psychology (CA BoP) to formally recognize CAPIC approved internships for the accrual of SPE hours for licensure in 2001. While CAPIC has no control over a state’s licensing regulations, we strongly advocate for internship choice and professional mobility pre-and post-licensure across states.

 

  1. Myth: There is no quality assurance (QA) or oversight of CAPIC internships once they are approved for membership.

Fact: Since 2010, CAPIC has implemented a rigorous QA process in which all current CAPIC internships are monitored annually and site-visited at scheduled time-points by a licensed psychologist. As of 2015, the period between these QA site visits has been set to every 5 years with internal reviews still being conducted annually, and site visits are conducted more frequently as needed.  See Schaefer et al (2011) for more discussion of these issues.

 

  1. Myth: Students completing CAPIC approved internships are not eligible for certain employment settings.

Fact: At present, there are some employers, such as the Veterans Administration (VA), that require applicants to have completed APA-accredited internships. CAPIC is strongly opposed to this restriction, especially since some of CAPIC’s own internships serve veterans. CAPIC is seeking to end such restrictions and continues to educate organizations on the facts of CAPIC internships.

Also, while some employers may also advertise such restrictions, actual practice is often more liberal and CAPIC alumni have served as Dean of APA-accredited doctoral academic programs, Chief Psychologists in a psychiatric hospital, psychologists within a Kaiser and federal prison setting, Training Director of doctoral and postdoctoral internships, and many more such positions.

 

  1. Myth: Students who have completed CAPIC approved internships do not pass the EPPP licensing exam at a similar rate compared to students who completed APA accredited internships.

Fact: The published data that support this myth are problematic in several ways. A recent study with data from students at Argosy University– San Francisco Bay Area showed no significant difference in licensure rate and professional outcomes between students with CAPIC and APPIC/APA internships. These results are posted on the CAPIC website:

Morrison, A., Schaefer, M., Ribner, N., & Puliatti, R. (January 2015). Training healthcare psychologists: Outcomes from multiple models. Poster presented at the National Council of Schools and Programs in Professional Psychology Mid-winter Conference, San Diego, CA.

 

  1. Myth: The supervisory quality of CAPIC internships is lower than that at APA accredited or APPIC member internships.

Fact: A recent study by the California School of Professional Psychology (CSPP)/Alliant International University – San Diego showed no significant difference in supervisory quality among CAPIC, APPIC and APA internships. These results are posted on the CAPIC website:

Bucky, S., Stolberg, R., Turner, S., & Kimmel, C. (April 2015). Comparison of supervisory characteristics across accrediting bodies and levels of training. Poster presented at the annual California Psychological Association convention, San Diego, CA.

 

  1. Myth: Students who complete CAPIC approved internships have lower post-licensure incomes than students who completed APPIC member or APA accredited internships.

Fact: While there may be some disparity in post-licensure income, any such income disparity is likely due to employment setting restrictions, not professional competency differences. Further, there are many other measures of success besides income, and many students seek CAPIC internships in order to work with local and underserved communities at publicly funded agencies where salaries are generally lower than other employment settings.

 

  1. Myth: Licensed psychologists who have completed CAPIC approved internships are less competent than their colleagues who completed APPIC member or APA accredited internships.

Fact: There are no data that supports this myth. Please also review the Morrison, Schaefer, Ribner, & Puliatti (2015) poster noted above.

 

  1. Myth: Students who have completed CAPIC approved internships are under-employed or unemployed at higher rather than students completing APPIC member or APA accredited internships.

Fact: There are no data that supports this myth.

 

  1. Myth: Only CAPIC endorses half-time internships.

Fact: While CAPIC pioneered the half-time internship model, it has since been accepted nationally.  Both APA and APPIC now recognize a two-year half time internship training model, although few such APPIC member and APA accredited internships exist at this time. See Emmons et al (2006) for a review of the half-time internship.

 

  1. Myth: Beginning in 2017 (or 2019 by some sources), the California Board of Psychology (CA BoP) will only accept APA-internships for licensure, and will no longer accept CAPIC or APPIC-member internships for licensure.

 

Fact:  This myth is patently false. The CA BoP recognizes CAPIC internships alongside APA-accredited and APPIC-member internships, and has no plans to change this policy. We have confirmed this fact directly with the CA BoP.  Any such change would require significant public comment and debate in which CAPIC would be an active participant and advocate.

 

For more information on our website about CAPIC and its unique place in psychology training in California, click here.  Please also feel free to contact the CAPIC office directly.  Thanks!

 

Studies cited in this document: 

Bucky, S., Stolberg, R., Turner, S., & Kimmel, C. (April 2015). Comparison of supervisory characteristics across accrediting bodies and levels of training. Poster presented at the annual California Psychological Association convention, San Diego, CA.

Emmons, L., Kenkel, M. B., Newman, G. H., Perl, R., & Mangione, L. (2006) A framework for the half-time internship in psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37, 643-650.   DOI: http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0735-7028.37.6.643 

Morrison, A., Schaefer, M., Ribner, N., & Puliatti, R. (January 2015). Training healthcare     psychologists: Outcomes from multiple models. Poster presented at the National Council of Schools and Programs in Professional Psychology Mid-winter Conference, San Diego, CA.

Schaefer, M. R., Newman, G. H., Perl, R., Morrison, A., Jordan, V. B. Wong, J. & Ribner, N. (2011). Shifting the paradigm: Alternative perspectives and solutions to increasing the availability of quality internships. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 5, 209-212. DOI: http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0026276

 

Last updated March 2016